If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

I like libav better because I support the reasons behind their fork, however I don't want to drag that stuff up and start a discussion about it. You can look into it more on your own if you wish of course, but there's no reason to get into an argument about it. If people like ffmpeg more I don't care, that's their opinion and they're entitled to it and I don't feel the need to try and say my opinion is any better.

The reasons for the fork were indeed good at the time. But it no longer applies today, and the FFmpeg folks are certainly more productive at the moment. In my opinion, they should just merge back again (and by merge back I mean close libav and have libav developers contribute to FFmpeg, since FFmpeg already merges things from libav, but seldom the other way round).

The reasons for the fork were indeed good at the time. But it no longer applies today, and the FFmpeg folks are certainly more productive at the moment. In my opinion, they should just merge back again (and by merge back I mean close libav and have libav developers contribute to FFmpeg, since FFmpeg already merges things from libav, but seldom the other way round).

I am aware of this, but for the time being I'm still sticking with libav whenever I can. I'm not very quick to forgive and I never forget, but I'll probably come around eventually.

Not just colors. The smaller issues just show up better on more "vibrant" videos, to complement the larger issues (like video brightness...)

Sounds like postprocessing. VLC may use different defaults than MPV for postprocessing but VLC uses standard FFmpeg video decoding could work exactly the same throughout all applications using FFmpeg.

Originally Posted by Daktyl198

Not the thread I saw, but close: https://trac.videolan.org/vlc/ticket/7936
^Basically says that they would have to re-write the entire UI because even though they would be using Qt5, it would not support Wayland. Also, they would have to re-write their EGL output.

Nowhere does this say that they “literally have to re-write their entire back-end because it's so shit.” VLC has more code to port because unlike MPV VLC has a proper GUI. Porting the current Qt4 UI to Qt5 and develop Wayland support for it as well is some work but it's less work than replacing wxWidgets with Qt and VLC already did that.
That Courmisch dude is also just one guy. Other members of the VLC team could be more convinced about a Wayland port.

There is no refusal to port to Wayland and there is no word about a shitty back-end.